DRAFT of the paper to be presented at the Canadian Political Science Conference University of Manitoba, Winnipeg 3-5 June, 2004 Rise of the Sikh Militancy An appraisal of the economic factor Birinder Pal Singh Department of Sociology & Social Anthropology Punjabi University, Patiala-147002 (India) [email protected] The Sikhs are an enterprising and a dynamic community. They are able to adjust to diverse situations and circumstances and still make a comfortable living in any part of the globe. A section of the Sikhs in the Indian Punjab was however involved in militant violence from 1978 to 1992. It cost the state exchequer many billions of rupees and loss of thousands of men in the security forces and others. Numerous public figures and political leaders including the then Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi succumbed to their violence. The impact of this violence was not only confined to the country but spilled over to all places where Sikhs had sizable population especially Canada, the U.S.A. and the western Europe. They were also involved in this struggle, directly and indirectly, following the premise of ‘distant nationalism’ a la Anderson. This militant movement has been characterized differently by various people and political parties on the basis of their ideology. The Indian government led by the Indian National Congress(Indra) labeled it a ‘separatist’ (separation from India), ‘disintegrationist’ (breaking the integrity of the Indian nation), ‘fundamentalist’ (a la Khomeini of Iran), and a ‘terrorist’ movement. The then dominant party in opposition, namely the Bhartiya Janta Party called it an ‘anti-Hindu’ and an ‘anti-national’ movement interested in creating Khalistan, a Sikh theocratic state. They consider India a nation of the Hindus and Sikhism a sect of Hinduism. The Communist parties characterized militancy an ‘extremist’, ‘undemocratic’, ‘fascist’, ‘obscurantist’, ‘ethnic’ and a ‘fundamentalist’ movement. But a sizable section of the Sikhs led by their democratic party the Shiromani Akali Dal, and later the militant groups spearheading the movement did not believe in such characterization. They considered themselves ‘fighting for a just cause’ that meant their rights, against discrimination, for freedom of belief, expression and action. The former had earlier passed an Anandpur Sahib Resolution in 1973 seeking more rights for the Indian provinces such that the regional communities and parties have more freedom presently curbed due to centralization of authority in New Delhi.1 The militant groups were crying aloud that they had a ‘distinct goal’, a ‘clear self-perception’, a ‘professed logic of violence’ in their movement. Each one of these issues is a subject of an independent inquiry. In the present paper I intend to limit myself only to that dimension which is most objective, namely the economic factor. It would help us gloss on the subjective self-proclamations as well as imputations made by others. This attempt is made in two parts. In Part 1, I intend to project only those statements and resolutions of the militants that pertain to the economic issues or their demands and that of the Akali Dal and other Sikh organizations. The Part 2,on the other hand includes the findings of the economists on the nature and state of the Punjab economy. A juxtaposition of the two perspectives would show that the issues that led to the rise of Sikh militancy were basically socio-economic and not religious even if these appeared to be so. The best way for the government would have been to redress the ‘real’ grievances of the Sikhs and the militants, and not to blow up the religious tenor of their demands. This approach could have facilitated the resolution of conflict rather than confounding it. Part 1. Sikh Militants’ Perspective: Let me explain a little in the beginning that there were numerous militant groups active in the Punjab that were trying to establish an independent sovereign state of Khalistan where ‘the Sikhs could experience a glow of their freedom’.2 Each one of these groups claimed to have a clear vision about the social, political, cultural and religious aspects of the future society of their dreams. But in the present paper the focus is only on the socio-economic issues raised by them in their proclamations – handouts, posters, booklets and press releases etc.3 Singh Khalsa proclaim that by Khalsa raj is meant a country (desh) or rule of pure people (shudh lokan). Khalsa raj would be free from evil (pap) and evildoers. Pain and suffering would not be there in theory or practice. It would also be farther from economic and cultural exploitation (lutt-khassutt). The Khalsa raj would be a truly democratic state.(Singh Khalsa,1985:1) They made it clear that their struggle was not directed against the poor of any caste or religion. ‘It is desirable that we must preach amongst the poorest of the poor and the lower castes, and among those who have been misled by the ideology of the Brahman and the Bania.’(Ibid:33)It is suggested that ‘the Hindu theory of Karma has made people timid, cowards and lazy. It has rendered them incapable of understanding what kind of spring (bahar) could economic and social change bring in their lives.’(Ibid:15)They argue that both Brahman and Bania are the rulers of the day. These reactionary forces are out to destroy the Khalsa since they do not tolerate the rise of any revolutionary philosophy. In such a situation: The Khalsa must win over the poor, and people of lower castes to his side who are slaves, both economically and socially. They must be made aware that the ideologies of Brahman and Bania (Brahmanwad ate Baniawad) are the cause of their ignorance (jahalat), poverty and weakness.(Ibid:17) Finally, they impressed upon the lower classes and castes the need to realize that it is only Khalsa who could uplift them and ensure complete independence (sampooran azadi). The Panthic Committee Panj Membari, a powerful apex body of five militant outfits headed by Dr. Sohan Singh, a former director of the health department of the Punjab government also suggests that in Khalistan: Lack of education and social backwardness will not be allowed to be an obstacle in their way. Nor the monopoly of education will be allowed, as a tool, to snatch the rights of the illiterate as the children of the rich, and urban residents leave behind the rural and poor children. The rich enjoy the boons (nihmatan) of nature much more than what is due to them while the children of the rural and the poor remain victims of illiteracy, poverty, diseases and backwardness generation after generation.(PCPM,1986:26) Sarbat Khalsa, a congregation of the whole Khalsa was held at the Akal Takht on January 26, 1987. It adopted a Gurmata (a resolution adopted by all those gathered in the presence of the sacred Sikh scripture, Guru Granth Sahib) that reaffirms the self-perception of each militant outfit: This congregation of today proclaims for the information of the whole world that the Khalsa, who wishes the welfare of all (sarbat da bhala), shall never attack the poor and the oppressed (mazloom). The present struggle of the Sikhs is directed against those plundering and destructive raiders (lotuan, dharwian ate vinashkarian) who have assaulted our principles (sidhant), gurdwaras (gurdham), Guru Granth (Bani), our form/dress (bana) and truthful earnings (kirat kamai)... This assembly of Sarbat Khalsa strongly endorses the armed struggles of the peoples of the world, especially those in India who are fighting against the tyrant colonial rule (zalam samraj) for their rights and independence... to maintain their cultural existence (sabhiacharak hond) and nationality. This congregation recommends the formation of all religious minorities front... to confront the Delhi government (Dilli sarkar).(Gurmata,1987:3) The militants were not only crying for their freedom and problems but also took notice of the living conditions of the poor people. They had identified agencies and institutions responsible for their poverty. Singh Khalsa stated categorically: ‘Our struggle is against anti-Khalsa powers (taktan) like the big Bania (vadde-vadde banian), capitalists, feudal lords, big (vadde-vadde) Brahmans (sic) and official informers.’ (Singh Khalsa,1985:32) The Babbar Khalsa International (BKI) the most dreaded militant outfit in the last phase (1989-92) also championed the cause of the poor who were getting poorer while the rich were growing richer. The poor peasant, however, gets exploited twice, initially at the time of selling his products and later while procuring essential commodities from the market. The BKI asserts: The Hindu capitalism (sic) intends to squeeze the poor economically, like a lemon, to such an extent that they could think of nothing more than mere subsistence and keep begging at their doors. These capitalists are leading a luxurious life after having sacrificed (bali le le ke) the means of subsistence, the sons, youth, honour and dignity of the poor. (Babbar,?:14) Wassan Singh Zaffarwal of the Khalistan Commando Force (KCF) also made it clear in his interview that there could be no compromise with the Brahmans because ‘they sit idle’. The government of Khalistan will be based on the principles of Sikhism enshrined in the Bani. He says forcefully: ‘We will not create a society where one human being is poor and sleeps in the street while his neighbour sleeps in the palace or a luxurious building. We shall eliminate all remaining feudal and monopolist forces.’Pettigrew,1995:154) Another leader of the KCF declares: ‘You cannot take money from any poor person, ever. We’re clear on that. However, we shall impose a tax of the Khalistan government on the wealthy. We don’t force money out of them.